planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Dec 13, 2018 3:43 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Well, it would look like that wouldn't it? If Hamilton puts it on pole everyone says Merc is quickest, if Vettel gets pole everyone says Ferrari is quickest.

Not necessarily. I think that Hamilton took pole in Malaysia with what was probably not the quickest car (but Vettel was out of the picture). He also took pole in Spain when the cars were equal.

However, I don't rate Hamilton's qualifying performance this season as highly as Vettel in 2011 for instance. Vettel in 2011 stole the pole on several occasions when McLaren looked to be quicker (Hungary, Japan, Abu Dhabi). I haven't see that from Hamilton this season.

Quote:
I agree that Hamilton's approach this season has been different. He's been very cautious all year. He's changed completely from the guy who couldn't play the percentages to the ultimate percentage player this year.

I agree that Lewis has been cautious and consistent this year, but the real question I have is: Would he still be able to drive like this and win the WDC, [b]if Mercedes was on average 3 tenths slower than Ferrari in qualifying instead of 3 tenths quicker?[/b]


Its the reason Vettel had it so easy in 2010 and 2011 - the Red Bull took pole every race bar 1 or 2.

But to paint that kind of picture for this year is not true. Yes the Mercedes is quicker over 1 lap. But Vettel still has 4 poles this year, 5 for Ferrari and they also had the car to do it in 2 other races (Malaysia and Spain) that is 7 out of 18. So whilst Mercedes is better, Vettel-Ferrari has still been capable of pole in 39% of the races. If Vettel manages to get pole in the last 2 races (not that unlikely) you could argue he had the car in 9/20 races, nearly 50%...

Also, in his title fight with Hamilton. He has overtaken Lewis 3 times before the first corner (Bahrain, Spain and USA) so after the first corners we have;

Hamilton ahead - 9 times
Vettel ahead - 9 times

Which is an interesting figure and shows Vettel hasn't lost this title because of qualifying disadvantage.

using the same maths, Lewis has had 11 poles so far this season and a car capable of delivering it on a further 3. Which means Mercedes has had a pole capable car on around 78% of races, exactly double the opportunities that Ferrari has had so far...

I'm finding this attempt at dismissing Mercedes' undoubted qualifying advantage this season by Lewis fans hilarious. It's not enough that he won the title, they have to paint him as somehow doing it against the odds? :lol:

Is lamo a Hamilton fan?

Whilst we have none Hamilton fans posting in several threads down playing past and present achievements.

You skip over what he said about after the corner Hamilton only being in front of Vettel 50% of the time and back to the same rhetoric of best qualifying car means a far superior car, also even suggesting any equality in the cars you read as Hamilton winning against the odds, strange.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
For next season, he needs a car that is faster in qualifying and more reliable. I'm convinced that his mistakes partially came from desperation and the fact that he was fighting an uphill battle for most of the season.


How does that explain Singapore, he would have taken back the lead of the championship with a healthy point lead after that race. Or even Baku which he should have won, he wasn't fighting an uphill battle performance wise but his team was lacking reliability wise.

Vettel was on pole in Mexico and that was his driving error. He didn't need to be so desperate.

Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Indeed and can we view Vettel as a paragon of judgement at the start of races were several times he's been involved in collisions were he hasn't given cars around him enough room, Mexico was another misjudgement.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
For next season, he needs a car that is faster in qualifying and more reliable. I'm convinced that his mistakes partially came from desperation and the fact that he was fighting an uphill battle for most of the season.


How does that explain Singapore, he would have taken back the lead of the championship with a healthy point lead after that race. Or even Baku which he should have won, he wasn't fighting an uphill battle performance wise but his team was lacking reliability wise.

Vettel was on pole in Mexico and that was his driving error. He didn't need to be so desperate.

Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3092
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
For next season, he needs a car that is faster in qualifying and more reliable. I'm convinced that his mistakes partially came from desperation and the fact that he was fighting an uphill battle for most of the season.


How does that explain Singapore, he would have taken back the lead of the championship with a healthy point lead after that race. Or even Baku which he should have won, he wasn't fighting an uphill battle performance wise but his team was lacking reliability wise.

Vettel was on pole in Mexico and that was his driving error. He didn't need to be so desperate.

Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


First I have heard that Verstappen was following Vettel :?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

How does that explain Singapore, he would have taken back the lead of the championship with a healthy point lead after that race. Or even Baku which he should have won, he wasn't fighting an uphill battle performance wise but his team was lacking reliability wise.

Vettel was on pole in Mexico and that was his driving error. He didn't need to be so desperate.

Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


First I have heard that Verstappen was following Vettel :?


He was following at Singapore, which is what was discussed here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3092
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


First I have heard that Verstappen was following Vettel :?


He was following at Singapore, which is what was discussed here.


I thought following someone actually means following someone from behind, not being cut up. Vettel initiated the crash, looks like he misjudged the gap to Verstappen. Vettel would have hit Kimi if they both kept going.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14265
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
For next season, he needs a car that is faster in qualifying and more reliable. I'm convinced that his mistakes partially came from desperation and the fact that he was fighting an uphill battle for most of the season.


How does that explain Singapore, he would have taken back the lead of the championship with a healthy point lead after that race. Or even Baku which he should have won, he wasn't fighting an uphill battle performance wise but his team was lacking reliability wise.

Vettel was on pole in Mexico and that was his driving error. He didn't need to be so desperate.

Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong
, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


I'm sorry but you're not the arbitrator of that.

I think Vettel was unfortunate but you know as well as I do what happened.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 1:00 pm
Posts: 72
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
For next season, he needs a car that is faster in qualifying and more reliable. I'm convinced that his mistakes partially came from desperation and the fact that he was fighting an uphill battle for most of the season.


How does that explain Singapore, he would have taken back the lead of the championship with a healthy point lead after that race. Or even Baku which he should have won, he wasn't fighting an uphill battle performance wise but his team was lacking reliability wise.

Vettel was on pole in Mexico and that was his driving error. He didn't need to be so desperate.

Singapore is easy to explain. He didn't make a mistake there. People crashed into him, not the other way around. Drivers cover each other off every single race.


And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


While he maybe did noting technically wrong according to the rules, he still misjudged the situation by taking much more risk than needed.

_________________
« Violent delights have violent ends »


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

And most manage to do it without crashing into the following drivers. Vettel misjudged a situation most manage fine.

Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


First I have heard that Verstappen was following Vettel :?


He was following at Singapore, which is what was discussed here.


I thought following someone actually means following someone from behind, not being cut up. Vettel initiated the crash, looks like he misjudged the gap to Verstappen. Vettel would have hit Kimi if they both kept going.


If you want to wordplay and get into semantics then fine; no one said following from behind, just following. Which is the case, Vettel was ahead, the rest were following.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3092
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Quite a feat to crash into a car that's following you.

Vettel did nothing wrong, as much as many want to paint him as the villain. It's not his fault people crashed into him


First I have heard that Verstappen was following Vettel :?


He was following at Singapore, which is what was discussed here.


I thought following someone actually means following someone from behind, not being cut up. Vettel initiated the crash, looks like he misjudged the gap to Verstappen. Vettel would have hit Kimi if they both kept going.


If you want to wordplay and get into semantics then fine; no one said following from behind, just following. Which is the case, Vettel was ahead, the rest were following.


To me it doesn’t actually look like Vettels ahead until Max and Kimi make contact so if there was no Kimi I dont even think Vettel would have been ahead of Max. Been done for ages anyway, Vettels not exactly innocent and most pundits, fans, whoever you like blame him.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:41 am
Posts: 753
Location: Toronto, Canada
I like Vettel but I have no issue saying he pretended to let his car struggle and veer left as he sliced Hamilton's rear wheel.

Whether he did that deliberately or did not we will never really know so I don't get why people would pick a hard line one way or the other on something you don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

First I have heard that Verstappen was following Vettel :?


He was following at Singapore, which is what was discussed here.


I thought following someone actually means following someone from behind, not being cut up. Vettel initiated the crash, looks like he misjudged the gap to Verstappen. Vettel would have hit Kimi if they both kept going.


If you want to wordplay and get into semantics then fine; no one said following from behind, just following. Which is the case, Vettel was ahead, the rest were following.


To me it doesn’t actually look like Vettels ahead until Max and Kimi make contact so if there was no Kimi I dont even think Vettel would have been ahead of Max. Been done for ages anyway, Vettels not exactly innocent and most pundits, fans, whoever you like blame him.


My previous message didn't go through, so I'm writing it again. We agree that it's been done to death; all this IF Kimi stuff... The good old IF a dinosaur ate Alonso... You may remember this. And no, you don't know that he would have hit Kimi if he had kept going.

The fact is that Vettel made a move that is allowed, is done very often, it was not a chop but rather a controlled move to the left and it wasn't him who touched another car, he was collected. You can say that he was too eager to go offensive, but that is not a crime exactly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3092
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

He was following at Singapore, which is what was discussed here.


I thought following someone actually means following someone from behind, not being cut up. Vettel initiated the crash, looks like he misjudged the gap to Verstappen. Vettel would have hit Kimi if they both kept going.


If you want to wordplay and get into semantics then fine; no one said following from behind, just following. Which is the case, Vettel was ahead, the rest were following.


To me it doesn’t actually look like Vettels ahead until Max and Kimi make contact so if there was no Kimi I dont even think Vettel would have been ahead of Max. Been done for ages anyway, Vettels not exactly innocent and most pundits, fans, whoever you like blame him.


My previous message didn't go through, so I'm writing it again. We agree that it's been done to death; all this IF Kimi stuff... The good old IF a dinosaur ate Alonso... You may remember this. And no, you don't know that he would have hit Kimi if he had kept going.

The fact is that Vettel made a move that is allowed, is done very often, it was not a chop but rather a controlled move to the left and it wasn't him who touched another car, he was collected. You can say that he was too eager to go offensive, but that is not a crime exactly.


Nope Vettel was too aggressive and misjudged the gap in wet conditions. It was a silly move and in the end he got what a silly move deserves really.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
I thought following someone actually means following someone from behind, not being cut up. Vettel initiated the crash, looks like he misjudged the gap to Verstappen. Vettel would have hit Kimi if they both kept going.


If you want to wordplay and get into semantics then fine; no one said following from behind, just following. Which is the case, Vettel was ahead, the rest were following.


To me it doesn’t actually look like Vettels ahead until Max and Kimi make contact so if there was no Kimi I dont even think Vettel would have been ahead of Max. Been done for ages anyway, Vettels not exactly innocent and most pundits, fans, whoever you like blame him.


My previous message didn't go through, so I'm writing it again. We agree that it's been done to death; all this IF Kimi stuff... The good old IF a dinosaur ate Alonso... You may remember this. And no, you don't know that he would have hit Kimi if he had kept going.

The fact is that Vettel made a move that is allowed, is done very often, it was not a chop but rather a controlled move to the left and it wasn't him who touched another car, he was collected. You can say that he was too eager to go offensive, but that is not a crime exactly.


Nope Vettel was too aggressive and misjudged the gap in wet conditions. It was a silly move and in the end he got what a silly move deserves really.


No, Vettel was not aggressive, see "chop" for aggressive. He left more than a car's width of gap and the accident was caused by Kimi being hidden by Max's car + spray + mirrors. Now that we've repeated it for the Nth time, are you happy?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3092
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:

If you want to wordplay and get into semantics then fine; no one said following from behind, just following. Which is the case, Vettel was ahead, the rest were following.


To me it doesn’t actually look like Vettels ahead until Max and Kimi make contact so if there was no Kimi I dont even think Vettel would have been ahead of Max. Been done for ages anyway, Vettels not exactly innocent and most pundits, fans, whoever you like blame him.


My previous message didn't go through, so I'm writing it again. We agree that it's been done to death; all this IF Kimi stuff... The good old IF a dinosaur ate Alonso... You may remember this. And no, you don't know that he would have hit Kimi if he had kept going.

The fact is that Vettel made a move that is allowed, is done very often, it was not a chop but rather a controlled move to the left and it wasn't him who touched another car, he was collected. You can say that he was too eager to go offensive, but that is not a crime exactly.


Nope Vettel was too aggressive and misjudged the gap in wet conditions. It was a silly move and in the end he got what a silly move deserves really.


No, Vettel was not aggressive, see "chop" for aggressive. He left more than a car's width of gap and the accident was caused by Kimi being hidden by Max's car + spray + mirrors. Now that we've repeated it for the Nth time, are you happy?


More than a cars width lol you believe what you want. Vettel was the catalyst for the crash, I saw numerous ex drivers/ pundits say the same thing. He was aggressive and misjudged the distance in conditions which was risky. I can't remember another driver apart from Vettel having numerous accidents at the front the past few years. Vettel was a big part of why he lost the championship like Hamilton's bad starts last year.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

To me it doesn’t actually look like Vettels ahead until Max and Kimi make contact so if there was no Kimi I dont even think Vettel would have been ahead of Max. Been done for ages anyway, Vettels not exactly innocent and most pundits, fans, whoever you like blame him.


My previous message didn't go through, so I'm writing it again. We agree that it's been done to death; all this IF Kimi stuff... The good old IF a dinosaur ate Alonso... You may remember this. And no, you don't know that he would have hit Kimi if he had kept going.

The fact is that Vettel made a move that is allowed, is done very often, it was not a chop but rather a controlled move to the left and it wasn't him who touched another car, he was collected. You can say that he was too eager to go offensive, but that is not a crime exactly.


Nope Vettel was too aggressive and misjudged the gap in wet conditions. It was a silly move and in the end he got what a silly move deserves really.


No, Vettel was not aggressive, see "chop" for aggressive. He left more than a car's width of gap and the accident was caused by Kimi being hidden by Max's car + spray + mirrors. Now that we've repeated it for the Nth time, are you happy?


More than a cars width lol you believe what you want. Vettel was the catalyst for the crash, I saw numerous ex drivers/ pundits say the same thing. He was aggressive and misjudged the distance in conditions which was risky. I can't remember another driver apart from Vettel having numerous accidents at the front the past few years. Vettel was a big part of why he lost the championship like Hamilton's bad starts last year.


Ah yes, lolling, the greatest evidence of them all...

And because Vettel had other accidents in the past he is guilty of each and every incident he is involved, right?


At least I agree with the last sentence, Vettel can only blame himself for losing the WDC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 1:00 pm
Posts: 72
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)

_________________
« Violent delights have violent ends »


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1941
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)


People are generally (and rightly IMO) placing the bulk of the blame on Vettel for Mexico but also generally still regard it as a racing incident - just that Vettel should take a look at his driving in the start phase. I think that's reasonable enough although a few did call for Vettel to be penalised and think he wasn't because of the circumstances of the WDC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)


Hi Fantaribo, it contributed yes. But it was a racing incident. It is seriously easy to see what happened and how Max got caught in a pincer move. Kimi could have lifted, Max could have lifted, Vettel could have gone straight, all of them avoiding the incident. But they all happened at the same time, so why is it Vettel's fault? Agreed he had the most to lose and could have played it more conservative.

On the same note with your last sentence, F1 is not a drag race, Vettel had every right to defend. Otherwise it would validate anyone with a better start to just pass by. Do you agree? Finally, blocking or defending is not illegal, crowding is. As there was space on his left there was no reason to think that he did anything wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 2000
Siao7 wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)


Hi Fantaribo, it contributed yes. But it was a racing incident. It is seriously easy to see what happened and how Max got caught in a pincer move. Kimi could have lifted, Max could have lifted, Vettel could have gone straight, all of them avoiding the incident. But they all happened at the same time, so why is it Vettel's fault? Agreed he had the most to lose and could have played it more conservative.

On the same note with your last sentence, F1 is not a drag race, Vettel had every right to defend. Otherwise it would validate anyone with a better start to just pass by. Do you agree? Finally, blocking or defending is not illegal, crowding is. As there was space on his left there was no reason to think that he did anything wrong.


No one said that he made an illegal move.

However, the fact that it was a legal does not absolve him of blame for the accident. He drove diagonally across the track and caused the accident.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
davidheath461 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)


Hi Fantaribo, it contributed yes. But it was a racing incident. It is seriously easy to see what happened and how Max got caught in a pincer move. Kimi could have lifted, Max could have lifted, Vettel could have gone straight, all of them avoiding the incident. But they all happened at the same time, so why is it Vettel's fault? Agreed he had the most to lose and could have played it more conservative.

On the same note with your last sentence, F1 is not a drag race, Vettel had every right to defend. Otherwise it would validate anyone with a better start to just pass by. Do you agree? Finally, blocking or defending is not illegal, crowding is. As there was space on his left there was no reason to think that he did anything wrong.


No one said that he made an illegal move.

However, the fact that it was a legal does not absolve him of blame for the accident. He drove diagonally across the track and caused the accident.

he didn't cause the accident


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)

I can, yes. He didn't cause the crash. Even as a Kimi fan I'd say Kimi had a larger portion of blame. He knew exactly where Verstappen was, had space on the inside to give him room and yet stayed too close to him, which ended up with him clipping Verstappen and collecting Vettel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14265
Zoue wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)

I can, yes. He didn't cause the crash. Even as a Kimi fan I'd say Kimi had a larger portion of blame. He knew exactly where Verstappen was, had space on the inside to give him room and yet stayed too close to him, which ended up with him clipping Verstappen and collecting Vettel


If Vettel stayed straight then no crash.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 892
Location: UK
This is being discussed on the "return of the crash kid" thread, that pile up in Singapore has been done to death, the point which stands out for me is how many times Vettel is involved in early race prangs. He must be doing something! Every time there is an incident his supporters blame the other drivers.
It would be nice if his avid fans were objective occasionally, on the law of averages he can't be blameless all the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6648
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)

I can, yes. He didn't cause the crash. Even as a Kimi fan I'd say Kimi had a larger portion of blame. He knew exactly where Verstappen was, had space on the inside to give him room and yet stayed too close to him, which ended up with him clipping Verstappen and collecting Vettel


If Vettel stayed straight then no crash.


If Kimi left room, if Max covered Kimi instead of Vettel, if, if, if...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)

I can, yes. He didn't cause the crash. Even as a Kimi fan I'd say Kimi had a larger portion of blame. He knew exactly where Verstappen was, had space on the inside to give him room and yet stayed too close to him, which ended up with him clipping Verstappen and collecting Vettel


If Vettel stayed straight then no crash.

he's not responsible for what those behind him did. If they took proper actions, then no crash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
Option or Prime wrote:
This is being discussed on the "return of the crash kid" thread, that pile up in Singapore has been done to death, the point which stands out for me is how many times Vettel is involved in early race prangs. He must be doing something! Every time there is an incident his supporters blame the other drivers.
It would be nice if his avid fans were objective occasionally, on the law of averages he can't be blameless all the time.

you can't assign blame on the law of averages. You need to assess each incident independently.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 892
Location: UK
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
This is being discussed on the "return of the crash kid" thread, that pile up in Singapore has been done to death, the point which stands out for me is how many times Vettel is involved in early race prangs. He must be doing something! Every time there is an incident his supporters blame the other drivers.
It would be nice if his avid fans were objective occasionally, on the law of averages he can't be blameless all the time.

you can't assign blame on the law of averages. You need to assess each incident independently.


Ok, you picked out the one weak sentence in my post, but is he a serial innocent?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
Option or Prime wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
This is being discussed on the "return of the crash kid" thread, that pile up in Singapore has been done to death, the point which stands out for me is how many times Vettel is involved in early race prangs. He must be doing something! Every time there is an incident his supporters blame the other drivers.
It would be nice if his avid fans were objective occasionally, on the law of averages he can't be blameless all the time.

you can't assign blame on the law of averages. You need to assess each incident independently.


Ok, you picked out the one weak sentence in my post, but is he a serial innocent?

It's just I'm not a great fan of the "person is a fan so can't be objective" line of reasoning. They aren't mutually exclusive and that just stifles debate. If you try to defend then you're essentially self-fulfilling the accusation! It's a no-win situation once the accusation is out there.

Vettel has been in a couple of incidents recently but that's not enough to label him a serial crash kid and I think people have short memories. Before the summer break he was widely touted as the the driver of the season. Now a couple of incidents later and he's out of control? I think there's a degree of finger pointing going on here that isn't justified.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 2:49 am
Posts: 868
like a number of seasons - a few 'bad results' can change the season - just like Webber (or Alonso) could have won 2010 - the former with just one better result (which would have been deserved - but we also have some teams where we know that the equipment wasn't equal, the 'better engine' (the one that gave a few km extra speed) was always given to one driver after a certain point (yes looking at you RBR - 2010-2013) and that can't help comparisons 'EVEN' if one driver does have the edge.

I don't think Seb has done himself any favours in a few races this year - but he certainly was in the running until 5 races ago - and has had a good season


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2636
Option or Prime wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
This is being discussed on the "return of the crash kid" thread, that pile up in Singapore has been done to death, the point which stands out for me is how many times Vettel is involved in early race prangs. He must be doing something! Every time there is an incident his supporters blame the other drivers.
It would be nice if his avid fans were objective occasionally, on the law of averages he can't be blameless all the time.
you can't assign blame on the law of averages. You need to assess each incident independently.
Ok, you picked out the one weak sentence in my post, but is he a serial innocent?
On the basis that he is involved in clean starts far more often than he is involved in 'dirty' starts..?

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
Zoue wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)


Hi Fantaribo, it contributed yes. But it was a racing incident. It is seriously easy to see what happened and how Max got caught in a pincer move. Kimi could have lifted, Max could have lifted, Vettel could have gone straight, all of them avoiding the incident. But they all happened at the same time, so why is it Vettel's fault? Agreed he had the most to lose and could have played it more conservative.

On the same note with your last sentence, F1 is not a drag race, Vettel had every right to defend. Otherwise it would validate anyone with a better start to just pass by. Do you agree? Finally, blocking or defending is not illegal, crowding is. As there was space on his left there was no reason to think that he did anything wrong.


No one said that he made an illegal move.

However, the fact that it was a legal does not absolve him of blame for the accident. He drove diagonally across the track and caused the accident.

he didn't cause the accident

If Vettel hadn't done what he did then there wouldn't have been an accident.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
Option or Prime wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
This is being discussed on the "return of the crash kid" thread, that pile up in Singapore has been done to death, the point which stands out for me is how many times Vettel is involved in early race prangs. He must be doing something! Every time there is an incident his supporters blame the other drivers.
It would be nice if his avid fans were objective occasionally, on the law of averages he can't be blameless all the time.

you can't assign blame on the law of averages. You need to assess each incident independently.


Ok, you picked out the one weak sentence in my post, but is he a serial innocent?

Yep, Hamilton brake tested him in Baku and then Vettel accidentally lost control of his car and side swiped Hamilton.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Fantaribo wrote:
You can't deny Vettel aggressivity at the start caused the crash, can you ?

I am not fond of the Vettel bashing bandwagon going on here since last sunday, but you have to admit that he got the lion's share of the blame for Singapore's start. There is not much Kimi or Verstappen could do (and don't tell me Max could have lift off, as it would validate the right for Vettel to block anybody overtaking him)


Hi Fantaribo, it contributed yes. But it was a racing incident. It is seriously easy to see what happened and how Max got caught in a pincer move. Kimi could have lifted, Max could have lifted, Vettel could have gone straight, all of them avoiding the incident. But they all happened at the same time, so why is it Vettel's fault? Agreed he had the most to lose and could have played it more conservative.

On the same note with your last sentence, F1 is not a drag race, Vettel had every right to defend. Otherwise it would validate anyone with a better start to just pass by. Do you agree? Finally, blocking or defending is not illegal, crowding is. As there was space on his left there was no reason to think that he did anything wrong.


No one said that he made an illegal move.

However, the fact that it was a legal does not absolve him of blame for the accident. He drove diagonally across the track and caused the accident.

he didn't cause the accident

If Vettel hadn't done what he did then there wouldn't have been an accident.

You mean race?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Hi Fantaribo, it contributed yes. But it was a racing incident. It is seriously easy to see what happened and how Max got caught in a pincer move. Kimi could have lifted, Max could have lifted, Vettel could have gone straight, all of them avoiding the incident. But they all happened at the same time, so why is it Vettel's fault? Agreed he had the most to lose and could have played it more conservative.

On the same note with your last sentence, F1 is not a drag race, Vettel had every right to defend. Otherwise it would validate anyone with a better start to just pass by. Do you agree? Finally, blocking or defending is not illegal, crowding is. As there was space on his left there was no reason to think that he did anything wrong.


No one said that he made an illegal move.

However, the fact that it was a legal does not absolve him of blame for the accident. He drove diagonally across the track and caused the accident.

he didn't cause the accident

If Vettel hadn't done what he did then there wouldn't have been an accident.

You mean race?

Yeah if that's what you call racing like we saw in Mexico as well, it's clumsy.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:

No one said that he made an illegal move.

However, the fact that it was a legal does not absolve him of blame for the accident. He drove diagonally across the track and caused the accident.

he didn't cause the accident

If Vettel hadn't done what he did then there wouldn't have been an accident.

You mean race?

Yeah if that's what you call racing like we saw in Mexico as well, it's clumsy.

Moving across is clumsy?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
he didn't cause the accident

If Vettel hadn't done what he did then there wouldn't have been an accident.

You mean race?

Yeah if that's what you call racing like we saw in Mexico as well, it's clumsy.

Moving across is clumsy?

When it causes a collision then yes.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
If Vettel hadn't done what he did then there wouldn't have been an accident.

You mean race?

Yeah if that's what you call racing like we saw in Mexico as well, it's clumsy.

Moving across is clumsy?

When it causes a collision then yes.

And we're back to he didn't cause the collision. Rinse, repeat.

So the driver in front is responsible for the actions of those behind him now?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28701
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Yeah if that's what you call racing like we saw in Mexico as well, it's clumsy.

Moving across is clumsy?

When it causes a collision then yes.

And we're back to he didn't cause the collision. Rinse, repeat.

So the driver in front is responsible for the actions of those behind him now?

When the driver in front doesn't give enough room, Vettel has form for this, read his crash kid thread, it seems to happen a few times with him to the point were it can be viewed as a weakness at the start of races when he has to deal with more than one car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23915
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Yeah if that's what you call racing like we saw in Mexico as well, it's clumsy.

Moving across is clumsy?

When it causes a collision then yes.

And we're back to he didn't cause the collision. Rinse, repeat.

So the driver in front is responsible for the actions of those behind him now?

When the driver in front doesn't give enough room, Vettel has form for this, read his crash kid thread, it seems to happen a few times with him to the point were it can be viewed as a weakness at the start of races when he has to deal with more than one car.

He did give enough room. He. Didn't. Hit. Anyone. And Max was well behind him, too. It was Kimi surging up from the inside that was the catalyst for the accident which subsequently collected Vettel. But Kimi had plenty of room on his inside and Vettel was pretty far from the edge of the circuit, too


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: amirb and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group